Category: administrationofjustice

18 January 2019The House of Lords EU Justice Sub-Committee has exchanged correspondence with the Government about clarifying the wording of the Political Declaration regarding the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

The EU Justice Sub-Committee wrote to the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice David Gauke in December in the context of its work on citizens’ rights. The Committee sought clarification about a change in wording between the draft and final versions of the Political Declaration regarding the UK’s relationship with European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).The reply from Edward Argar MP, Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Justice, was received last week. The Government’s response again pledged an unchanging commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms, but it did not explain the reason for the change in wording in the Political Declaration. The letter ended with a reference to revisiting the Human Rights Act once the process of leaving the EU is concluded, and the Committee is concerned by the lack of assurances about the Government’s commitment to the Human Rights Act post-Brexit.Further informationImage: iStockphoto

14 January 2019The Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill has its third reading, a chance to ‘tidy up’ the bill and make changes, in the Lords on Tuesday 15 January.

Members are expected to discuss the definition of a terminally ill person and the government designation of areas outside the UK by way of regulations to be laid before parliament.Lords report stage day two: Monday 17 DecemberMembers discussed a range of topics including a review of proscribed organisations, the case for national identity numbers and the responsibility of the government to produce reports on individuals detained under new port and border controls.There was one division (vote) on a proposed amendment (change) to the bill.The vote concerned the insertion of new provision which would require the Secretary of State to make arrangements, within six month’s of the Act’s passing, for an independent review on the government’s strategy to prevent vulnerable people being drawn into terrorism.The provision would require any such report to:be laid before both Houses of Parliament within 18 months of the Act’s passinginclude a statement from the Secretary of State in response to all recommendations made within the review214 members of Lords voted in favour of the amendment and 196 voted against, and so the change was made.Third reading, a chance to ‘tidy up’ the bill and make changes, is yet to be scheduled.Lords report stage day one: Monday 3 DecemberMembers discussed a range of subjects including expression of support for proscribed organisations, reasons for entering or remaining in designated areas and publication of images.There were two divisions (votes) on proposed changes (amendments) to the bill.Members considered a change which would make it an offence for a person to express an opinion or belief that ‘supports’ a proscribed organisation, rather than using the broader meaning of ‘is supportive of’, which could be applied to people beyond those who actually intend any wrong or harm.93 Members were in favour of this amendment, with 198 against, and so the change was not made.The next vote was on the addition of a number of situations in which an individual, who goes into or remains in a designated area, would not be committing an offence by that act. Such situations would include providing humanitarian aid, carrying out the work for the United Nations and working as a journalist.220 members voted in favour of this addition and 191 voted against, and so the change was made.Lords committee stage day four: Wednesday 14 NovemberMembers discussed retention and protection of journalistic and legally privileged material, declaration of dual passports and access to a solicitor.Lords committee stage day three: Monday 12 NovemberMembers discussed a range of subjects, including the introduction of national identity numbers, continued participation in the European Arrest Warrant and biometric data.Lords committee stage day two: Wednesday 31 OctoberMembers discussed subjects including the act of treason in aiding a hostile state or organisation, extended sentences for terrorism offences and notification requirements.Lords committee stage day one: Monday 29 OctoberMembers discussed subjects including expressions of support for proscribed organisations, publication of images and seizure of articles and the movement of UK citizens in areas designated as having a risk of terrorism.Lords second reading: Tuesday 9 OctoberMembers discussed the pattern of radicalisation, new offences regarding expressing support for terrorist organisations and overseas travel.Baroness Williams of Trafford (Conservative), minister of state in the Home Office, responded on behalf of the government.Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill summaryThis bill aims to:Amend certain terrorism offences for the digital age and to reflect contemporary patterns of radicalisationIncrease the maximum penalty for certain offences, ensuring the punishment better reflects the crime and better prevents re-offendingManage offenders following their release from custodyStrengthen powers of the police to prevent and investigate terrorist offencesHarden the UK’s defences at the border against hostile state activityFurther informationImage: PA

14 January 2019The Voyeurism (Offences) (No.2) Bill has its third reading, a chance to ‘tidy up’ the bill and make changes, in the Lords on Tuesday 15 January.

No changes have yet been suggested to the bill ahead of third reading. Members may discuss the progress of the bill at the conclusion of its Lords stages.If no changes are made, then both Houses will have agreed on the text of the bill and it will await Royal Assent, when it will become an Act of Parliament (law).Lords report stage: Tuesday 18 DecemberNo changes were suggested to the bill ahead of report stage.Third reading, a chance to ‘tidy up’ the bill and make changes, is yet to be scheduled.Lords committee stage: Monday 26 NovemberMembers discussed the recording of images which invade the privacy of persons and disclosure of images for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime.Lords second reading: Tuesday 23 OctoberMembers discussed a number of issues raised by the bill, including the online sharing of non-consensual intimate images, the targeting of vulnerable victims and the current Law Commission review into the classification of misogyny and misandry as hate crimes.Lord Keen of Elie (Conservative), Lords spokesperson in the Ministry of Justice, responded on behalf of the government.Voyeurism (Offences) (No. 2) Bill summaryThis bill will aim to insert two new offences in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 to cover the practice known colloquially as ‘upskirting’.The new offences would apply in instances when:without consent, an individual operates equipment or records an image beneath a person’s clothing to observe their genitalia or buttocks, whether covered or uncovered by underwear garmentsthe offender has a motive of either obtaining sexual gratification or causing humiliation, distress or alarm to the victim.The bill would also ensure that the most serious offenders, where the purpose of the offence is for sexual gratification, are made subject to notification requirements (often referred to as being placed on the ‘sex offenders register’).Further informationImage: iStockphoto

10 January 2019On Wednesday 16 January the House of Lords debates the European Union Committee’s report, Brexit: will consumers be protected? which was published on 19 December 2017.

The report called on the Government to explain exactly how it intends to ensure that UK citizens’ consumer rights will be protected and enforced after the UK leaves the European Union. The Committee argued that mirroring the rights we currently have in EU law (via the EU Withdrawal Act) is not on its own enough. The report also called on the Government to share its plan for how it intended to maintain the UK’s access to the many EU based agencies and networks that contribute to the protection of consumers’ rights.The Government’s disappointing response was received in February last year, and this debate is the Committee’s first opportunity to discuss these issues with the Government.The debate is being moved by Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws. Speakers include Lord Bilimoria, Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town, Lord Henley and The Earl of Kinnoull.Other Members of the House of Lords who are due to speak in the debate can be viewed on the Government Whips’ Office Speakers’ Lists.Further informationImage: iStockphoto

19 December 2018Members of the Lords, including the chair of the National Commission on Muslim Women and the former deputy chair of the Commission for Racial Equality, will debate the impact of Islamophobia in the United Kingdom, in the House of Lords on Thursday 20 December.

This is a balloted debate. They normally take place on a Thursday in the chamber. During debates, members are able to put their experience to good use, discussing current issues and drawing the government’s attention to concerns.The debate was proposed by Lord Sheikh (Conservative), vice chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Race and Community.Members expected to take part include:Baroness Afshar (Crossbench), chair of the Communication Committee at the British Muslim Research CentreBaroness Burt of Solihull (Liberal Democrat), former shadow Secretary of State for EqualitiesLord Parekh (Labour), former deputy chair of the Commission for Racial EqualityBaroness Uddin (Non-affiliated), chair of the National Commission on Muslim WomenBaroness Warsi (Conservative), treasurer of the All Party Parliamentary Group on British MuslimsLord Bourne of Aberystwyth (Conservative), parliamentary under-secretary in the Department for Housing, Communities and Local Government, will respond on behalf of the government.Further informationImage: iStockphoto

19 December 2018Members of the Lords, including the shadow attorney general and a former Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service, will debate the remit of, and arrangements for the handling of evidence by, the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, in the House of Lords on Thursday 20 December.

This is a balloted debate. They normally take place on a Thursday in the chamber. During debates, members are able to put their experience to good use, discussing current issues and drawing the government’s attention to concerns.The debate was proposed by Lord Campbell-Savours (Labour), former member of the parliamentary Joint Committee on the Draft Charities Bill 2004-05.Members expected to take part include:Baroness Chakrabarti (Labour), shadow attorney general and council member of law reform and human rights organisation JUSTICELord Hunt of Wirral (Conservative), chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Legal and Constitutional Affairs Lord Paddick (Liberal Democrat), former Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police ServiceBaroness Barran (Conservative), government whip, will respond on behalf of the government.Further informationImage: iStockphoto

19 December 2018The Voyeurism (Offences) (No.2) Bill had its report stage, a further chance to examine the bill and make changes, in the Lords on Tuesday 18 December.

No changes were suggested to the bill ahead of report stage.Third reading, a chance to ‘tidy up’ the bill and make changes, is yet to be scheduled.Lords committee stage: Monday 26 NovemberMembers discussed the recording of images which invade the privacy of persons and disclosure of images for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime.Lords second reading: Tuesday 23 OctoberMembers discussed a number of issues raised by the bill, including the online sharing of non-consensual intimate images, the targeting of vulnerable victims and the current Law Commission review into the classification of misogyny and misandry as hate crimes.Lord Keen of Elie (Conservative), Lords spokesperson in the Ministry of Justice, responded on behalf of the government.Voyeurism (Offences) (No. 2) Bill summaryThis bill will aim to insert two new offences in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 to cover the practice known colloquially as ‘upskirting’.The new offences would apply in instances when:without consent, an individual operates equipment or records an image beneath a person’s clothing to observe their genitalia or buttocks, whether covered or uncovered by underwear garmentsthe offender has a motive of either obtaining sexual gratification or causing humiliation, distress or alarm to the victim.The bill would also ensure that the most serious offenders, where the purpose of the offence is for sexual gratification, are made subject to notification requirements (often referred to as being placed on the ‘sex offenders register’).Further informationImage: iStockphoto

13 December 2018The Joint Committee on Human Rights launches inquiry into whether parliament should set up a specific mechanism to scrutinise international agreements for compliance with human rights and what processes should be followed to ensure adequate scrutiny of compliance with human rights standards in international agreements post-Brexit.

BackgroundInternational Agreements contain increasingly important provisions in a modern, globalised world and can have significant impacts on a huge variety of areas. Deals done in such agreements can impact on the human rights of those living in the UK and also the human rights of those living overseas. This could involve justice or home affairs treaties, such as mutual legal cooperation or extradition treaties, or trade deals allowing businesses special access to markets or the export of goods that could be used in human rights violations. All of these agreements have the potential to impact human rights, such as the rights of workers, the right to be free from servitude and forced labour, and the right to privacy of data as it passes across borders.Send us your viewsThe Joint Committee on Human Rights seeks written evidence on the best mechanisms to ensure that human rights are protected in the UK’s future international agreements. In particular we are interested in the following questions:Should the UK Parliament have better mechanisms for scrutinising the human rights protections contained in international agreements contemplated by the UK? If yes, what processes, information and analysis might be appropriate? What should the JCHR’s role be?Should the UK require standard clauses in international agreements to protect human rights? For example:

should the UK require a standard exemptions clause such that nothing in the agreement prevents the UK from adopting measures necessary for the protection of the UK’s domestic and international human rights obligations?should the UK require a standard suspension clause to highlight the importance of human rights in inter-State relations and to provide for potential sanctions if human rights standards slip below a certain threshold?how should UK international trade rules ensure adequate restrictions continue to apply to the export of equipment that could be used in human rights abuses, such as torture?

The House of Lords Constitution Committee is also inquiring into Parliamentary Scrutiny of treaties more broadly.Send a submission to the Human Rights Protections in International Agreements inquirySubmissions should be no more than 1,500 words. The deadline for submissions is Monday 14 January 2019.The Committee is likely to take evidence early in the New Year so prompt submission is particularly helpfulFurther informationImage: iStockphoto

12 December 2018Members of the Lords, including a former lecturer in youth and community work at Sunderland Polytechnic and a former health education advisor for the Inner London Education Authority, will debate the challenges facing young people, in the House of Lords on Thursday 13 December.

This is a general debate. They normally take place on a Thursday in the chamber. During debates, members are able to put their experience to good use, discussing current issues and drawing the government’s attention to concerns.The debate was proposed by Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top (Labour), former lecturer in youth and community work at Sunderland Polytechnic.Members expected to take part include:Earl of Listowel (Crossbench), board member and trustee of the Child and Family Practice Charitable FoundationBaroness Massey of Darwen (Labour), former health education advisor for the Inner London Education AuthorityLord Norton of Louth (Conservative), ambassador for the Albert Kennedy Trust support organisation for homeless LGBT+ young peopleLord Storey (Liberal Democrat), former primary school head teacher and co-chair of the Liberal Democrat PPC on Education, Families and Young PeopleLord Agnew of Oulton (Conservative), parliamentary under-secretary in the Department for Education, will respond on behalf of the government.Further informationImage: iStockphoto